RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02320
INDEX CODE:137.00
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her late husband’s records be corrected to reflect that he elected
spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Her late husband told her not to worry about monetary funds, as his
retirement would take care of her when he was no longer able to or if
he passed away.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Prior to his 1 June 1974 retirement, the servicemember elected child
only SBP coverage. The servicemember’s marital status at the time of
his retirement could not be verified. The Defense Enrollment
Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) records reflect his was
previously married to C. His youngest child lost eligibility in June
1984. The servicemember married D. on 4 September 1992. There is no
indication in his records that he notified the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service (DFAS) of the change in his marital status, nor did
he request SBP coverage be established on his new spouse. The
servicemember died on 7 October 2003.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPTR states had the servicemember elected to add C. to his
coverage at the time of his retirement or within the first year of
their marriage, spouse coverage would have been suspended following
the loss of C.’s eligibility and the spouse coverage could have been
reestablished after being married for one year to D. Furthermore, the
servicemember had two opportunities to elect coverage on the
applicant’s behalf during the 1992-1993 and 1999-2000 open enrollment
periods. Notwithstanding the servicemember’s 19 May 2003 letter to
DFAS requesting his address be updated to reflect a ten-year old new
mailing address, he failed to properly advise DFAS of the change and
his records reflected the Sycamore Road address as early as November
1993, as well as at the time of his death. SBP is similar to
commercial life insurance in that an individual must elect to
participate and pay the required premiums in order to be covered.
DPPTR further states to approve this request would provide the
applicant an additional opportunity to elect SBP coverage not afforded
to other retired servicemembers similarly situated.
AFPC/DPPTR finds no evidence of error or injustice and therefore,
recommends the requested relief be denied (Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 3 September 2004, for review and response. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing
law or regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the
interest of justice to excuse the failure of timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the
applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case;
however, we agree with the opinion and the recommendation of the Air
Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. If
the servicemember had elected SBP spouse coverage at the time of his
retirement, or within the first year of his marriage to C., the spouse
coverage would have been suspended at the termination of that
marriage, thus allowing him to reestablish spouse coverage for the
applicant at the end of their first year of marriage. Further, the
Board notes the servicemember was afforded the opportunity to enroll
in SBP during two authorized open enrollments, but failed to do so.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the
application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-02320 in Executive Session on 2 December 2004, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Panel Chair
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Jul 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, dated 27 Aug 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Sep 04.
ROSCOE HINTON, JR.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02681
He received a response in September 2003, informing him the request he submitted was not received until after the authorized open enrollment period. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit B. After his first marriage ended, he remarried in February 1998; however, his current spouse is not eligible to receive RSFPP because the marriage occurred after the applicant retired.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00978
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The divorce decree ordered the servicemember to provide former spouse coverage for her under the SBP, but neither the servicemember nor she was aware of the one-year requirement to submit an election for former spouse coverage. Neither the servicemember nor the applicant made an election for former spouse coverage within one-year following their divorce. The applicant reviewed the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00293
We do not take issue with the applicant’s contention her divorce decree ordered her deceased former husband to provide former spouse coverage for her under the SBP, but he did not do so. However, since neither the applicant nor her deceased former husband took the necessary actions to ensure she was provided former spouse coverage under the SBP within the one-year period in which they could have done so, it appears that the applicant has no legal entitlement to the relief sought. It...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01398
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR indicates that the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) was established by Public Law (PL) 92-425 on 21 September 1972, authorizing a one-year open enrollment period for servicemembers to elect coverage. However, if the Board recommends granting the request, the servicemember’s record should be corrected to show the servicemember elected SBP spouse only coverage based on full retired pay effective 21...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00024
DFAS records indicate that the former service member declined SBP coverage prior to his 1 July 1978 retirement. The member had an opportunity to provide coverage for the applicant during the SBP open enrollment periods authorized by Public Laws (PLs) 97-35 (1 Oct 81 – 30 Sep 82) and 101-189 (1 Apr 92 – 31 Mar 93), but there is no evidence he made such an election. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and...
There were no provisions in the law at that time to notify spouses if the servicemember did not elect coverage. There is no evidence that the servicemember elected SBP during any of the authorized open enrollments. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Apr 02.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04100
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Public Law (PL) 99-145 requires spouses of married servicemembers to concur in writing prior to the servicemember’s retirement, in the SBP election that provides less than full spouse coverage. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states the applicant contends the finance center did not have her husband’s information to process an election. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00023
The DPSFCM evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 16 April 2004 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). We note that the Air Force office of primary responsibility for SBP coverage recommends providing relief for that part of the applicant’s request concerning SBP coverage, while the Air Force office of primary...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01902
On 12 August 2004, the Board staff requested the applicant provide a copy of the election he submitted for former spouse coverage (Exhibit F). On 26 August 2004, the Board staff requested the applicant provided a copy of his election for former spouse coverage following his divorce. Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01225
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not informed that he had to add his present wife to the SBP within one year of marriage. DPPTR’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant’s spouse responds to the advisory opinion and states that they were married in 1998 and made a trip to Keesler AFB to get ID cards, enroll in...